Abstract
The present study was carried out at Sakha Agricultural Research Station (clayey soils) during 2018 and 2019 to find out the role of water deficit on yield and some water relations for sorghum and cowpea summer forage crops. Three irrigation levels were executed; 100% (full irrigation), 90% (10% deficit) and 80% (20% deficit). Results showed that increasing water deficit, markedly led to decreasing fresh, dry yield and plant height at the three cuts in the two seasons. Regarding water relations, irrigation level with 90% (10% deficit) resulted in several advantages; almost same yield as recorded under full irrigation, 10% water saving as well as the highest values of water productivity (WP) and productivity of irrigation water (PIW). The mean values of fresh sorghum forage yield can be arranged in descending order as; 2917.0 > 2857.5 > 2561.0 kg.plot-1, while the corresponding values of the dry weight were; 381.6> 367.8> 319.6 kg.plot-1. Plant height for cowpea slightly affected with different irrigation treatments. On the contrary, both fresh and dry yields were significantly affected with water level or deficit irrigation. Moreover, the effect was highly significant in connection with the combined analysis. In this regard, mean values of fresh yield descending arranged as; 1502.5> 1447.0> 1321.5 kg.plot-1 for treatments A(control), B (90%) and C (80%), respectively. The corresponding values regarding dry yield are 253.5, 241.0 and 215.4 kg.plot-1. Comparing the deficit treatments with the control irrigation (Trt. A), overall mean decrease in fresh yield was 3.7% for treatment B (90%) and 12% for treatment C (80%). While, the corresponding decrease in dry yield were 4.9% and 15.0%.We can conclude that forage yield of sorghum and cowpea not affect by water irrigation deficit about 10% at Middle North Nile Delta area.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 15
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing deficit reduced fresh yield, dry yield and height over cuts and seasons.
- Taxon
- Sorghum and Cowpea
Vigna unguiculata
Sorghumt0 - Treatment
- increasing water deficite0
- Outcome
- fresh, dry yield and plant heighte0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increasing water deficit, markedly led to decreasing fresh, dry yield and plant height at the three cuts in the two seasons”
t0“Sorghum and Cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
At 90% irrigation, yield was almost the same as full irrigation.
- Taxon
- Sorghum and CowpeaVigna unguiculataSorghumt0
- Treatment
- 90% (10% deficit)e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- almost samee0
- Comparator
- full irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“irrigation level with 90% (10% deficit) resulted in several advantages; almost same yield as recorded under full irrigation”
t0“Sorghum and Cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
At 90% irrigation, water saving was 10%.
- Taxon
- Sorghum and CowpeaVigna unguiculataSorghumt0
- Treatment
- 90% (10% deficit)e0
- Outcome
- water savinge0
- Value
- 10%e0
- Comparator
- full irrigatione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“irrigation level with 90% (10% deficit) resulted in several advantages; almost same yield as recorded under full irrigation, 10% water saving”
t0“Sorghum and Cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
At 90% irrigation, water productivity and irrigation water productivity were highest.
- Taxon
- Sorghum and CowpeaVigna unguiculataSorghumt0
- Treatment
- 90% (10% deficit)e0
- Outcome
- water productivity (WP) and productivity of irrigation water (PIW)e0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- full irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“irrigation level with 90% (10% deficit) resulted in several advantages; almost same yield as recorded under full irrigation, 10% water saving as well as the highest values of water productivity (WP) and productivity of irrigation water (PIW)”
t0“Sorghum and Cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Sorghum fresh forage yield ranked 2917.0, 2857.5 and 2561.0 kg.plot-1 across irrigation levels.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fresh sorghum forage yield can be arranged in descending order as; 2917.0 > 2857.5 > 2561.0 kg.plot-1”
Claim · model-written summary
Sorghum dry weight ranked 381.6, 367.8 and 319.6 kg.plot-1.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“corresponding values of the dry weight were; 381.6> 367.8> 319.6 kg.plot-1”
e1“fresh sorghum forage yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea height was only slightly affected by irrigation treatments.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- different irrigation treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Plant heighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plant height for cowpea slightly affected with different irrigation treatments.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea fresh and dry yields were significantly affected by irrigation level.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Treatment
- deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- fresh and dry yieldse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both fresh and dry yields were significantly affected with water level or deficit irrigation”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea fresh yield was 1502.5, 1447.0 and 1321.5 kg.plot-1 for control, 90% and 80% irrigation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Outcome
- fresh yielde0
- Direction
- descendinge0
- Value
- 1502.5> 1447.0> 1321.5 kg.plot-1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean values of fresh yield descending arranged as; 1502.5> 1447.0> 1321.5 kg.plot-1 for treatments A(control), B (90%) and C (80%), respectively”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea dry yield was 253.5, 241.0 and 215.4 kg.plot-1 for control, 90% and 80% irrigation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Outcome
- dry yielde0
- Value
- 253.5, 241.0 and 215.4 kg.plot-1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“corresponding values regarding dry yield are 253.5, 241.0 and 215.4 kg.plot-1”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea fresh yield fell 3.7% under 90% irrigation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Treatment
- treatment B (90%)e0
- Outcome
- fresh yielde0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 3.7%e0
- Comparator
- control irrigation (Trt. A)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“overall mean decrease in fresh yield was 3.7% for treatment B (90%) and 12% for treatment C (80%)”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
e2“control irrigation (Trt. A)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea fresh yield fell 12% under 80% irrigation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Treatment
- treatment C (80%)e0
- Outcome
- fresh yielde0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 12%e0
- Comparator
- control irrigation (Trt. A)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“overall mean decrease in fresh yield was 3.7% for treatment B (90%) and 12% for treatment C (80%)”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
e2“control irrigation (Trt. A)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea dry yield fell 4.9% under 90% irrigation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Treatment
- B (90%)e2
- Outcome
- dry yielde0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 4.9%e0
- Comparator
- A(control)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“corresponding decrease in dry yield were 4.9% and 15.0%”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
e2“treatments A(control), B (90%) and C (80%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea dry yield fell 15.0% under 80% irrigation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Treatment
- C (80%)e2
- Outcome
- dry yielde0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 15.0%e0
- Comparator
- A(control)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“corresponding decrease in dry yield were 4.9% and 15.0%”
e1“Plant height for cowpea”
e2“treatments A(control), B (90%) and C (80%)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude a 10% irrigation deficit can retain sorghum and cowpea forage yield in the Middle North Nile Delta.
- Taxon
- sorghum and cowpeaVigna unguiculataSorghume0
- Outcome
- water irrigation deficit about 10%e0
- Setting
- Middle North Nile Delta areae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“forage yield of sorghum and cowpea not affect by water irrigation deficit about 10% at Middle North Nile Delta area”
The same questions in other papers
drought · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 papers →drought · yield · SorghumResults differ
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
51 papers more in this group
See all 55 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.